Communication systems and computer networks are becoming increasingly sophisticated, and each system attempts to accommodate more and more users and peripherals. As a result, a typical system may include a large array of patch panels or similar hardware configurations with hundreds of individual ports for accommodating hundreds of interconnections to a communication server or network. Appropriate identification of each port is critical to maintain a properly configured system. When a port is reconfigured, or a user or peripheral device is changed, the identification of the port should also be changed, typically referred to as a revision process.
A number of prior art identification labeling techniques have been proposed. Perhaps one of the most common systems is also one of the most rudimentary. On the faceplate of a patch panel or other hardware that provides a port for interconnection, a conventional rectangular adhesive sticker may be applied in the vicinity of the port to which it identifies. Such a sticker is typically supplied from a label stock that includes an adhesive backing. In use, the appropriate identification information is inscribed on the face of the sticker, typically by printing with a printer or by manually using a pen, and a backing is removed to expose the adhesive, and the sticker is manually applied in the desired location on the faceplate of a panel that includes the port.
Such a conventional technique has many disadvantages. Such a conventional sticker provides no protection for the surface of the sticker such that smudging of the identification information on the sticker may occur during application, and may also occur inadvertently during cleaning or contact with the surface of the sticker. Application of the sticker must be precise, and requires fine manual dexterity. This problem is frequently compounded when the panel is disposed such that visibility and physical access to the ports may be obstructed, such as when the panel is located in a closet, near a wall, under a desk or another relatively inconvenient location.
Another disadvantage of such a conventional sticker is that, over time, the adhesive quality of the sticker may deteriorate and the sticker—and the identification of the port—may be lost, particularly if the panel is exposed to heat or humidity. Another disadvantage is that such a conventional sticker does not accommodate a revision process. In other situations, old stickers can be difficult or impossible to remove. If a new sticker is placed on top of an old sticker, the adhesive integrity may be deficient and the sticker may be inadvertently removed.
Another conventional prior art labeling technique involves providing a rectangular recess in a panel to accommodate a rectangular paper label. This prior art labeling technique is generally illustrated in FIGS. 1-4. In some cases the paper label may be covered with a clear plastic shield for protection. As seen, however, the design maintains a slot that is open at one or both ends. Thus, as depicted in FIG. 4, when inserting the label and sleeve, there is a tendency for the label 220 to slide beyond the end of the recess and into the slot behind the bottom wall, sometimes resulting in losing the label or misaligned placement of the label that obscures identification information.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,613,874 to Orlando et al. discloses another identification labeling technique where a snap-in designation strip may be attached to the front of a faceplate. As illustrated in FIG. 2 of Orlando et al., a paper label protected by a clear plastic cover may be inserted into a groove. The strip is attached to and extends from the surface of the faceplate by means of tabs, each having two arms, disposed on the back of the strip and which may be inserted into corresponding slots of the faceplate. Since the strip would be irremovable once attached to the faceplate, the grooves must be open-ended to allow for changes to the labeling. Among some of the disadvantages of the Orlando et al. technique are that similar to other prior art techniques, the label could be easily disengaged through inadvertent contact that slips the label within the grooves. Also, as seen from FIG. 2 of Orlando et al., the technique is relatively cumbersome, requiring significant manual dexterity to envelop the paper label with the plastic cover and insert that assembly into the groove. In addition, if the labeling is being performed as part of a revision process, the paper label and plastic cover assembly must be inserted into the groove while the strip is attached to the faceplate because the design of the arms does not allow for removal of the strip once attached to the faceplate. Thus, if the faceplate is disposed in a location with restricted physical access, insertion of a new label for a revision process may be very difficult. Furthermore, since the Orlando et al. technique requires one paper label for designation of multiple ports, during a revision process the identification information for both ports would need to be printed again on a new label, even if the designation information for only one of the ports was being updated.
In view of the aforementioned deficiencies and disadvantages of prior art identification labeling techniques, there is a need for an improved identification labeling system that is versatile, conveniently accommodates revisions, and provides suitable protection for a plurality of different types of identification labels.